All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Andre Przywara <andre.przywara@arm.com>
To: Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>
Cc: kvm@vger.kernel.org, kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu,
	Alexandru Elisei <alexandru.elisei@arm.com>,
	Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH][kvmtool] virtio/pci: Size the MSI-X bar according to the number of MSI-X
Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2021 12:10:35 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20210831121035.6b5c993b@slackpad.fritz.box> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210827115405.1981529-1-maz@kernel.org>

On Fri, 27 Aug 2021 12:54:05 +0100
Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org> wrote:

Hi Marc,

> Since 45d3b59e8c45 ("kvm tools: Increase amount of possible interrupts
> per PCI device"), the number of MSI-S has gone from 4 to 33.
> 
> However, the corresponding storage hasn't been upgraded, and writing
> to the MSI-X table is a pretty risky business. Now that the Linux
> kernel writes to *all* MSI-X entries before doing anything else
> with the device, kvmtool dies a horrible death.
> 
> Fix it by properly defining the size of the MSI-X bar, and make
> Linux great again.
> 
> This includes some fixes the PBA region decoding, as well as minor
> cleanups to make this code a bit more maintainable.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>

Many thanks for fixing this, it looks good to me now. Just some
questions below:

> ---
>  virtio/pci.c | 42 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------------
>  1 file changed, 30 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/virtio/pci.c b/virtio/pci.c
> index eb91f512..41085291 100644
> --- a/virtio/pci.c
> +++ b/virtio/pci.c
> @@ -7,6 +7,7 @@
>  #include "kvm/irq.h"
>  #include "kvm/virtio.h"
>  #include "kvm/ioeventfd.h"
> +#include "kvm/util.h"
>  
>  #include <sys/ioctl.h>
>  #include <linux/virtio_pci.h>
> @@ -14,6 +15,13 @@
>  #include <assert.h>
>  #include <string.h>
>  
> +#define ALIGN_UP(x, s)		ALIGN((x) + (s) - 1, (s))
> +#define VIRTIO_NR_MSIX		(VIRTIO_PCI_MAX_VQ + VIRTIO_PCI_MAX_CONFIG)
> +#define VIRTIO_MSIX_TABLE_SIZE	(VIRTIO_NR_MSIX * 16)
> +#define VIRTIO_MSIX_PBA_SIZE	(ALIGN_UP(VIRTIO_MSIX_TABLE_SIZE, 64) / 8)
> +#define VIRTIO_MSIX_BAR_SIZE	(1UL << fls_long(VIRTIO_MSIX_TABLE_SIZE + \
> +						 VIRTIO_MSIX_PBA_SIZE))
> +
>  static u16 virtio_pci__port_addr(struct virtio_pci *vpci)
>  {
>  	return pci__bar_address(&vpci->pci_hdr, 0);
> @@ -333,18 +341,27 @@ static void virtio_pci__msix_mmio_callback(struct kvm_cpu *vcpu,
>  	struct virtio_pci *vpci = vdev->virtio;
>  	struct msix_table *table;
>  	u32 msix_io_addr = virtio_pci__msix_io_addr(vpci);
> +	u32 pba_offset;
>  	int vecnum;
>  	size_t offset;
>  
> -	if (addr > msix_io_addr + PCI_IO_SIZE) {

Ouch, the missing "=" looks like another long standing bug you fixed, I
wonder how this ever worked before? Looking deeper it looks like the
whole PBA code was quite broken (allowing writes, for instance, and
mixing with the code for the MSIX table)?

> +	BUILD_BUG_ON(VIRTIO_NR_MSIX > (sizeof(vpci->msix_pba) * 8));
> +
> +	pba_offset = vpci->pci_hdr.msix.pba_offset & ~PCI_MSIX_TABLE_BIR;

Any particular reason you read back the offset from the MSIX capability
instead of just using VIRTIO_MSIX_TABLE_SIZE here? Is that to avoid
accidentally diverging in the future, by having just one place of
definition?

> +	if (addr >= msix_io_addr + pba_offset) {
> +		/* Read access to PBA */
>  		if (is_write)
>  			return;
> -		table  = (struct msix_table *)&vpci->msix_pba;
> -		offset = addr - (msix_io_addr + PCI_IO_SIZE);
> -	} else {
> -		table  = vpci->msix_table;
> -		offset = addr - msix_io_addr;
> +		offset = addr - (msix_io_addr + pba_offset);
> +		if ((offset + len) > sizeof (vpci->msix_pba))
> +			return;
> +		memcpy(data, (void *)&vpci->msix_pba + offset, len);

Should this be a char* cast, since pointer arithmetic on void* is
somewhat frowned upon (aka "forbidden in the C standard, but allowed as
a GCC extension")?

Cheers,
Andre

> +		return;
>  	}
> +
> +	table  = vpci->msix_table;
> +	offset = addr - msix_io_addr;
> +
>  	vecnum = offset / sizeof(struct msix_table);
>  	offset = offset % sizeof(struct msix_table);
>  
> @@ -520,7 +537,7 @@ int virtio_pci__init(struct kvm *kvm, void *dev, struct virtio_device *vdev,
>  
>  	port_addr = pci_get_io_port_block(PCI_IO_SIZE);
>  	mmio_addr = pci_get_mmio_block(PCI_IO_SIZE);
> -	msix_io_block = pci_get_mmio_block(PCI_IO_SIZE * 2);
> +	msix_io_block = pci_get_mmio_block(VIRTIO_MSIX_BAR_SIZE);
>  
>  	vpci->pci_hdr = (struct pci_device_header) {
>  		.vendor_id		= cpu_to_le16(PCI_VENDOR_ID_REDHAT_QUMRANET),
> @@ -543,7 +560,7 @@ int virtio_pci__init(struct kvm *kvm, void *dev, struct virtio_device *vdev,
>  		.capabilities		= (void *)&vpci->pci_hdr.msix - (void *)&vpci->pci_hdr,
>  		.bar_size[0]		= cpu_to_le32(PCI_IO_SIZE),
>  		.bar_size[1]		= cpu_to_le32(PCI_IO_SIZE),
> -		.bar_size[2]		= cpu_to_le32(PCI_IO_SIZE*2),
> +		.bar_size[2]		= cpu_to_le32(VIRTIO_MSIX_BAR_SIZE),
>  	};
>  
>  	r = pci__register_bar_regions(kvm, &vpci->pci_hdr,
> @@ -560,8 +577,9 @@ int virtio_pci__init(struct kvm *kvm, void *dev, struct virtio_device *vdev,
>  	vpci->pci_hdr.msix.cap = PCI_CAP_ID_MSIX;
>  	vpci->pci_hdr.msix.next = 0;
>  	/*
> -	 * We at most have VIRTIO_PCI_MAX_VQ entries for virt queue,
> -	 * VIRTIO_PCI_MAX_CONFIG entries for config.
> +	 * We at most have VIRTIO_NR_MSIX entries (VIRTIO_PCI_MAX_VQ
> +	 * entries for virt queue, VIRTIO_PCI_MAX_CONFIG entries for
> +	 * config).
>  	 *
>  	 * To quote the PCI spec:
>  	 *
> @@ -570,11 +588,11 @@ int virtio_pci__init(struct kvm *kvm, void *dev, struct virtio_device *vdev,
>  	 * For example, a returned value of "00000000011"
>  	 * indicates a table size of 4.
>  	 */
> -	vpci->pci_hdr.msix.ctrl = cpu_to_le16(VIRTIO_PCI_MAX_VQ + VIRTIO_PCI_MAX_CONFIG - 1);
> +	vpci->pci_hdr.msix.ctrl = cpu_to_le16(VIRTIO_NR_MSIX - 1);
>  
>  	/* Both table and PBA are mapped to the same BAR (2) */
>  	vpci->pci_hdr.msix.table_offset = cpu_to_le32(2);
> -	vpci->pci_hdr.msix.pba_offset = cpu_to_le32(2 | PCI_IO_SIZE);
> +	vpci->pci_hdr.msix.pba_offset = cpu_to_le32(2 | VIRTIO_MSIX_TABLE_SIZE);
>  	vpci->config_vector = 0;
>  
>  	if (irq__can_signal_msi(kvm))


WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Andre Przywara <andre.przywara@arm.com>
To: Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>
Cc: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
	kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu, kvm@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH][kvmtool] virtio/pci: Size the MSI-X bar according to the number of MSI-X
Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2021 12:10:35 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20210831121035.6b5c993b@slackpad.fritz.box> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210827115405.1981529-1-maz@kernel.org>

On Fri, 27 Aug 2021 12:54:05 +0100
Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org> wrote:

Hi Marc,

> Since 45d3b59e8c45 ("kvm tools: Increase amount of possible interrupts
> per PCI device"), the number of MSI-S has gone from 4 to 33.
> 
> However, the corresponding storage hasn't been upgraded, and writing
> to the MSI-X table is a pretty risky business. Now that the Linux
> kernel writes to *all* MSI-X entries before doing anything else
> with the device, kvmtool dies a horrible death.
> 
> Fix it by properly defining the size of the MSI-X bar, and make
> Linux great again.
> 
> This includes some fixes the PBA region decoding, as well as minor
> cleanups to make this code a bit more maintainable.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>

Many thanks for fixing this, it looks good to me now. Just some
questions below:

> ---
>  virtio/pci.c | 42 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------------
>  1 file changed, 30 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/virtio/pci.c b/virtio/pci.c
> index eb91f512..41085291 100644
> --- a/virtio/pci.c
> +++ b/virtio/pci.c
> @@ -7,6 +7,7 @@
>  #include "kvm/irq.h"
>  #include "kvm/virtio.h"
>  #include "kvm/ioeventfd.h"
> +#include "kvm/util.h"
>  
>  #include <sys/ioctl.h>
>  #include <linux/virtio_pci.h>
> @@ -14,6 +15,13 @@
>  #include <assert.h>
>  #include <string.h>
>  
> +#define ALIGN_UP(x, s)		ALIGN((x) + (s) - 1, (s))
> +#define VIRTIO_NR_MSIX		(VIRTIO_PCI_MAX_VQ + VIRTIO_PCI_MAX_CONFIG)
> +#define VIRTIO_MSIX_TABLE_SIZE	(VIRTIO_NR_MSIX * 16)
> +#define VIRTIO_MSIX_PBA_SIZE	(ALIGN_UP(VIRTIO_MSIX_TABLE_SIZE, 64) / 8)
> +#define VIRTIO_MSIX_BAR_SIZE	(1UL << fls_long(VIRTIO_MSIX_TABLE_SIZE + \
> +						 VIRTIO_MSIX_PBA_SIZE))
> +
>  static u16 virtio_pci__port_addr(struct virtio_pci *vpci)
>  {
>  	return pci__bar_address(&vpci->pci_hdr, 0);
> @@ -333,18 +341,27 @@ static void virtio_pci__msix_mmio_callback(struct kvm_cpu *vcpu,
>  	struct virtio_pci *vpci = vdev->virtio;
>  	struct msix_table *table;
>  	u32 msix_io_addr = virtio_pci__msix_io_addr(vpci);
> +	u32 pba_offset;
>  	int vecnum;
>  	size_t offset;
>  
> -	if (addr > msix_io_addr + PCI_IO_SIZE) {

Ouch, the missing "=" looks like another long standing bug you fixed, I
wonder how this ever worked before? Looking deeper it looks like the
whole PBA code was quite broken (allowing writes, for instance, and
mixing with the code for the MSIX table)?

> +	BUILD_BUG_ON(VIRTIO_NR_MSIX > (sizeof(vpci->msix_pba) * 8));
> +
> +	pba_offset = vpci->pci_hdr.msix.pba_offset & ~PCI_MSIX_TABLE_BIR;

Any particular reason you read back the offset from the MSIX capability
instead of just using VIRTIO_MSIX_TABLE_SIZE here? Is that to avoid
accidentally diverging in the future, by having just one place of
definition?

> +	if (addr >= msix_io_addr + pba_offset) {
> +		/* Read access to PBA */
>  		if (is_write)
>  			return;
> -		table  = (struct msix_table *)&vpci->msix_pba;
> -		offset = addr - (msix_io_addr + PCI_IO_SIZE);
> -	} else {
> -		table  = vpci->msix_table;
> -		offset = addr - msix_io_addr;
> +		offset = addr - (msix_io_addr + pba_offset);
> +		if ((offset + len) > sizeof (vpci->msix_pba))
> +			return;
> +		memcpy(data, (void *)&vpci->msix_pba + offset, len);

Should this be a char* cast, since pointer arithmetic on void* is
somewhat frowned upon (aka "forbidden in the C standard, but allowed as
a GCC extension")?

Cheers,
Andre

> +		return;
>  	}
> +
> +	table  = vpci->msix_table;
> +	offset = addr - msix_io_addr;
> +
>  	vecnum = offset / sizeof(struct msix_table);
>  	offset = offset % sizeof(struct msix_table);
>  
> @@ -520,7 +537,7 @@ int virtio_pci__init(struct kvm *kvm, void *dev, struct virtio_device *vdev,
>  
>  	port_addr = pci_get_io_port_block(PCI_IO_SIZE);
>  	mmio_addr = pci_get_mmio_block(PCI_IO_SIZE);
> -	msix_io_block = pci_get_mmio_block(PCI_IO_SIZE * 2);
> +	msix_io_block = pci_get_mmio_block(VIRTIO_MSIX_BAR_SIZE);
>  
>  	vpci->pci_hdr = (struct pci_device_header) {
>  		.vendor_id		= cpu_to_le16(PCI_VENDOR_ID_REDHAT_QUMRANET),
> @@ -543,7 +560,7 @@ int virtio_pci__init(struct kvm *kvm, void *dev, struct virtio_device *vdev,
>  		.capabilities		= (void *)&vpci->pci_hdr.msix - (void *)&vpci->pci_hdr,
>  		.bar_size[0]		= cpu_to_le32(PCI_IO_SIZE),
>  		.bar_size[1]		= cpu_to_le32(PCI_IO_SIZE),
> -		.bar_size[2]		= cpu_to_le32(PCI_IO_SIZE*2),
> +		.bar_size[2]		= cpu_to_le32(VIRTIO_MSIX_BAR_SIZE),
>  	};
>  
>  	r = pci__register_bar_regions(kvm, &vpci->pci_hdr,
> @@ -560,8 +577,9 @@ int virtio_pci__init(struct kvm *kvm, void *dev, struct virtio_device *vdev,
>  	vpci->pci_hdr.msix.cap = PCI_CAP_ID_MSIX;
>  	vpci->pci_hdr.msix.next = 0;
>  	/*
> -	 * We at most have VIRTIO_PCI_MAX_VQ entries for virt queue,
> -	 * VIRTIO_PCI_MAX_CONFIG entries for config.
> +	 * We at most have VIRTIO_NR_MSIX entries (VIRTIO_PCI_MAX_VQ
> +	 * entries for virt queue, VIRTIO_PCI_MAX_CONFIG entries for
> +	 * config).
>  	 *
>  	 * To quote the PCI spec:
>  	 *
> @@ -570,11 +588,11 @@ int virtio_pci__init(struct kvm *kvm, void *dev, struct virtio_device *vdev,
>  	 * For example, a returned value of "00000000011"
>  	 * indicates a table size of 4.
>  	 */
> -	vpci->pci_hdr.msix.ctrl = cpu_to_le16(VIRTIO_PCI_MAX_VQ + VIRTIO_PCI_MAX_CONFIG - 1);
> +	vpci->pci_hdr.msix.ctrl = cpu_to_le16(VIRTIO_NR_MSIX - 1);
>  
>  	/* Both table and PBA are mapped to the same BAR (2) */
>  	vpci->pci_hdr.msix.table_offset = cpu_to_le32(2);
> -	vpci->pci_hdr.msix.pba_offset = cpu_to_le32(2 | PCI_IO_SIZE);
> +	vpci->pci_hdr.msix.pba_offset = cpu_to_le32(2 | VIRTIO_MSIX_TABLE_SIZE);
>  	vpci->config_vector = 0;
>  
>  	if (irq__can_signal_msi(kvm))

_______________________________________________
kvmarm mailing list
kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu
https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/kvmarm

  reply	other threads:[~2021-08-31 11:10 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-08-27 11:54 [PATCH][kvmtool] virtio/pci: Size the MSI-X bar according to the number of MSI-X Marc Zyngier
2021-08-27 11:54 ` Marc Zyngier
2021-08-31 11:10 ` Andre Przywara [this message]
2021-08-31 11:10   ` Andre Przywara
2021-08-31 11:28   ` Marc Zyngier
2021-08-31 11:28     ` Marc Zyngier
2021-08-31 11:39     ` Andre Przywara
2021-08-31 11:39       ` Andre Przywara
2021-08-31 15:05 ` Will Deacon
2021-08-31 15:05   ` Will Deacon

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20210831121035.6b5c993b@slackpad.fritz.box \
    --to=andre.przywara@arm.com \
    --cc=alexandru.elisei@arm.com \
    --cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu \
    --cc=maz@kernel.org \
    --cc=will@kernel.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.